TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (3) TMI 501
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case is about 2 seizures of consignments of "Corial Lacquer FM" on September 23, 1995 and September 25, 1995 at Chichira check-post on the ground that the goods is specified in Part A of Schedule IV of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994, referred to hereinafter as "the 1994 Act", but no sales tax permit was produced on demand in spite of reasonable opportunity being given for the purpose. It may be mentioned at this stage that by interim order dated November 24, 1995 liberty was given to respondents to proceed with the penalty proceedings and complete the same according to law but they were directed not to demand penalty, if any, imposed on the applicants till final disposal of the present application. We are informed by Mr. A.K. Roy, lea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... industry as a top coat finishing material. The further case of the applicants is that according to the principle of ejusdem generis, the item cannot be said to be included in entry 51 of Schedule IV. In this connection reference has been made to the decision in the case of Siddeshwari Cotton Mills (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [1989] 75 STC 75 (SC). 3.. The application has been resisted by respondents who have filed an affidavit-in-opposition. According to them, Corial Lacquer FM is nothing but lacquer and it falls under item 51 and/or entry No. 78 of Schedule IV to 1994 Act. They contend that the principle of ejusdem generis is not applicable to the present case. 4.. An affidavit-in-reply was filed by the applicants reiterating their ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n which it is understood in trade parlance. On this point he relied on the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Jaswant Singh Charan Singh [1967] 19 STC 469 (SC). The basic argument of Mr. Roy is that the item in question is not the lacquer described in entry 51, although it has been described as lacquer in the transportation documents produced at the check-post. In support of this, he wants to use a certificate dated February 28, 1996 issued by the Leather Chemicals Manufacturers Association which reads as follows: "This is to certify that Corial Lacquer FM marketed by BASF India Limited, has normal use in leather industry. It is further certified that the said Corial Lacquer FM, is known in the chemicals trade circle as a chemical and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....", irrespective of whether lacquer is a paint or not. In another manner, entry 51 can also be interpreted. It can be so understood that the inclusive part of the definition of "paints of all kinds " ends with "acrylic and plastic emulsion paints" and the expressions subsequently appearing including "lacquer" are distinct and separate commodities mentioned therein. In both the ways, one cannot avoid to interpret that lacquer is a goods specified in entry No. 51. The next point which is significant is that entry No. 51 which is a part of statute has not qualified the word lacquer by any means. The word, "lacquer" has been used without any limitation or qualification. That being so, all kinds of goods which are lacquer are obviously included i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....papers of the applicant-company produced at the check-post. For example, annexures "C" and "D" of the present application, referred to the said excise tariff item No. 3208.30 which comes under the main item No. 32.08 under chapter 32. Thus annexures "C" and "D" clearly show that the company itself described the goods as Corial Lacquer FM. The chapter 32 of excise tariff deals with dyes, colours, paints and tanning extracts. Item 32.08 under that chapter deals with paints and varnishes and sub-item 3208.30 deals with paints and varnishes paste on cellulose nitrate or other cellulose derivatives. The applicant-company has furnished annexure "E", their own literature, which described the item as Corial Lacquer FM and again as nitrocellulose la....